Jeffrey Laude was 7 years older than US Marine Joseph Scott Pemberton, just 19 and a recent hi-school grad

Turns out United States Marine Private First Class Joseph Scott Pemberton is just 19 years old and graduated High School only last year. In a report published by the American news site South Coast Today, Pemberton is described by his uncle as “a really good kid” while a neighbour called him “a friendly person” and recalled his last memory of the boy “walking home from school and just waving as I was cutting the grass”. According to the report, Pemberton graduated in 2013 from technical school majoring in metal fabrication and joining.

Filipino transgender Geena Rocero became a fashion model in the US before coming out with the truth about his birth gender recently.At 26 years old, on the other hand, the late transgender Jeffrey Laude was seven years Pemberton’s senior. Laude, we recall, was found dead in an Olongapo City apartment after supposedly checking in with Pemberton early this week. Pemberton has since been the primary suspect in an on-going homicide investigation supposedly being conducted by the Philippine police supposedly with the “full cooperation” of the US military who are in the Philippines for joint naval exercises. It was later revealed that Laude is engaged to a German national who he reportedly met on the Internet — information Laude’s family seemingly withheld from the public in the first statements they released to the media following the discovery of Laude’s remains.

In popular parlance, Pemberton is “barely legal”. United States law considers sexual relations with a minor (defined as a person below the age of 18 years) a crime and the legal drinking age under US law is 21. The equivalent of statutory rape in Philippine Law is stipulated in Republic Act 8353, or the “The Anti-Rape Law of 1997” and is called Chapter Three Rape.

Under this clause, rape is committed…

By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances:

a) Through force, threat, or intimidation;

b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious;

c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and

d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present.

A strong case could be made in Pemberton’s favour around Items (b) and (c) owing to his being under the influence of alcohol and possibly also to Laude’s significant seniority over Pemberton and the widely-held theory that he had misled Pemberton into thinking he was a woman. Indeed, according to the testimony of witness Mark Clarence Gelviro who was Laude’s other companion at the hotel, Laude had “asked him to leave before the foreigner could discover that they were transgenders.”

However, as shown in the snippet above, a quirk in Philippine law seem to imply that only men can be convicted of rape and only women can be regarded as victims of rape. While Pemberton evidently does not qualify as a minor in this case as Philippine Law has a far looser definition of what constitutes a minor, he also may not qualify because he is a man. And if that detail could be somehow circumvented by Pemberton’s defense, his attorneys will have to convince Philippine courts to regard Laude as a man — his gender at birth.

It is ironic that activists who are making this case out to be about “equal rights” could later be relying on a law that is inherently gender-biased to further their cause against not just Pemberton but the entire US Military organisation.

It is also interesting to note that Filipino transgenders have quite the track record of publicly misrepresenting themselves. A most recent case is Filipino male transgender Geena Rocero. Rocero had been a contestant at gay beauty pageants in the Philippines since he was 15 then migrated to the United States and registered himself with the authorities there as a woman. This was after he underwent the “necessary surgery” in Thailand to complete his physical transformation. Rocero then went on to a career in fashion modeling as a woman, apparently not disclosing his past as a man to his colleagues until recently.

Thank you for enlightening this $#%#$%65. And if Pemberton’s lawyers were smart enough, rape is not a defense in homicide. He is a military personnel. Please refer to self-defense as a justifying circumstance. If at all, you want to make a somewhat intelligent opinion, you might want to focus on jurisdiction and the enforcement thereof.

You don’t get it. The author is trying to make out a rape case in defense of the marine, not for the gay. It might not even be murder for the gay, because the presence of passion, obfuscation is inconsistent with premeditation which is a qualifying circumstance in murder.

It’s no reason for killing, right. What the author could possibly be saying is that the gay’s deceit could pass for cause for passion-obfuscation as mitigating circumstance. This, coupled with the barely legal/minority status of the marine versus the seniority of the gay employing the deceit, could turn the tables and make out a rape case by the gay against the marine. Rape, as pointed out, doesn’t always involve force but deceit also (loss of will or consciousness). The law is not to be so rigid as to negate justice. Rather, the spirit of the law is such that justice may prevail. Bottomline, the author is saying it could be the gay’s fault and the marine could be justified for killing the deceitful gay who tried to rape him.

While the first half article 266-A of the anti-rape law is gender specific (as quoted above) the second part covering object and ass-rape is not gender specific:

Article 266-A. Rape: When And How Committed. – Rape is committed:
1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances:
a) Through force, threat, or intimidation;
b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious;
c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and
d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present.

2) By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another person’s mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person.

So under the second part of the statute a gay man could be guilty of raping a straight dude if through the circumstances stated in the first half the gay dude ass rapes, or oral rapes, or instrument rapes a straight dude. there are no gender descriptors in the second part of section 266-A of the anti-rape law.

i am not getting the point of the whole rape argument though as other readers have pointed out that this is a murder case?

also i get a feeling that this article is trying to stack the deck against trannies in general by portraying them as liars? am i wrong?

Thanks. You can interpret this article as one that is “trying to stack the deck against trannies in general by portraying them as liars,” of course. That’s your prerogative. Or you can interpret it as one that presents an alternative perspective which I think you actually get considering you helped clarify said angle.

But to answer your question from my personal perspective, I’m saying that the circumstantial evidence so far observed supports the theory that Laude deliberately lied about the underlying nature of his physiology. The additional material citing Geena Rocero as an example illustrates an individual case. But if you read the actual news item linked to in the above article, you will find that the lie Rocero lived is actually sugarcoated by the “heroism” of his coming out as a transgender. But the fact I highlight here is that Rocero lied to his employer and his colleagues and that is simply wrong. Unforunately that wrongness has become a mere side issue that is outshined by this whole layer of PR spun around gay people “coming out” after years of deliberate deception.

The downplaying of this deception and the glamorisation of Rocero’s coming out is disturbing, in my opinion, because it is likely to further encourage LGBTs to go down a similar path of lying to achieve a goal then covering up that period of deception with a heroic “coming out” circus later.

first, such a breath of fresh air for someone to respond based on ideas instead of insults and/or ranting. yes, it’s possible to agree to disagree and remain respectful.

second, i’m assuming you have no issue against LGBTs and appear to tolerate them (saying in effect, that they need not lie about their gender). i also have a disdain for coming out circuses (so what if you’re gay, i didn’t have a staying hetero party).

however, not all people are as enlightened (see assorted homophobic posts here). so LGBTs are in their minds forced to lie to gain acceptance, avoid discrimination or being killed.

i have lived too long (or watched too much of the dark knight) and know that honesty may not always be the best policy.

as an aside: do you get paid to write these articles? do you take articles from readers?

praise: your articles are genuine discussions of current issues and not hardline stances on issues. we need more of that in the philippines. they should be required reading for high school or college social studies classes. keep doing the lord’s work.

@triple_r, thanks again. Yes I have no issue with LGBTs. But, like most normal people, I can relate with the annoyance and outrage of being lied to and deceived. The truth may not be the best policy at the moment in some circumstances, but more often than not, dishonesty=trouble in the long run.

Re your other question, all the authors and contributors of GRP are volunteers and don’t get paid. Whatever motivates or influences what they write outside of the range of visibility of GRP editors is none of our business. The key editorial criteria here is that each author be personally accountable to the critical scrutiny their work attracts from GRP readers and commenters. As such, the editors generally do not meddle in individual authors’ or contributors’ point of view or position on any matter.

Yes we do take articles from readers. If you are interested in contributing, email me at benign0@yahoo.com.

In the case of Rocero, hapless LGBTs will point out that because of “oppression,” they are forced to lie about their sexuality. But the thing is, why lie when it’s easier to avoid trouble by being honest about it? I remember the case I cited in my older article mentioning LGBTs, that of Domainlor Cabading.

I personally knew Joseph till he was about 12, he was the nices, kindest kid you could meet , and from what I’m told he grew up to stay that way…no one knows why Joseph did what he did….I personally do not think he snapped because he was deceived, and I know for a fact it wasn’t a hate crime, Joseph has a sister who is gay…He is from a bi-racial family that does not discriminate!!! I feel for the victims family, but there has to be more to this story then we know and I think it’s wrong for people to assume it was just plain murder!! He comes from a good family who loves him very much and my heart breaks for them because that could be anyone of our sons!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay
Gay is a term that primarily refers to a homosexual person or the trait of being homosexual. The term was originally used to refer to feelings of being “carefree”, “happy”, or “bright and showy”. The term’s use as a reference to homosexuality may date as early as the late 19th century, but its use gradually increased in the 20th century. In modern English, gay has come to be used as an adjective, and as a noun, referring to the people, especially to gay males, and the practices and cultures associated with homosexuality.

By the end of the 20th century, the word gay was recommended by major LGBT groups and style guides to describe people attracted to members of the same sex. At about the same time, a new, pejorative use became prevalent in some parts of the world. In the Anglosphere, this connotation, among younger speakers, has a derisive meaning equivalent to rubbish or stupid (as in “That’s so gay.”). In this use, the word does not mean “homosexual”, so it can be used, for example, to refer to an inanimate object or abstract concept of which one disapproves. This usage can also refer to weakness or unmanliness. When used in these ways, the extent to which it still retains connotations of homosexuality has been debated and harshly criticized.

In comparing the laude case and rocero’s case in terms of misrepresentation of their physical attributes and thus “wrongness”, the author seem to imply that murder was justifiable in laude’s case and if we extend the logic further, US citizenship revoked and deportation proceedings would have been alright in the case of rocero’s case.

I think that the author’s peroration on motives is misplaced as the motives of the murder suspect should have been given more weight. Rocero’s case is irrelevant here as murder could not be treated in the same class as perjury. Neither are age and gender relevant in the commission of a crime.

Rape could be raised in this case but certainly cannot succeed and it is bound to fail. There is no indication whatsoever that rape happened basing on the evidences presented. Clearly there is a strong hate agaisnt the lady which is fatal that caused her to suffer a painful death. I would like to draw your attention that this case is murder someone has to be held responsible for it. You can not associate this case to Miss Rocero’s life journey. There is no similiarity on these two cases apart from successfully adapted a female presentation which i think is not a crime. Less weight would be given if you would say you acted violently resulting to death and punish the vulnerable because you are made to believe that the person you are with is not who they are. Bear in mind that the court would hear this argument but would not focus on this. The court would rely on facts and evidences surrounding the case that are more helpful to assist them in judging.

in all fairness I think the author’s preposition of the victim’s “gender deception” on this article is simple to state a case wherein the american accused can use as an excuse and not as the motive of the crime. I have read this on twitter that if indeed Laude deceived Pemberton of his real gender, Pemberton can use an excuse that the killing is accidental upon finding Laude’s real gender. of course murder is murder but we should set the right perspective on this case and not join the bandwagon of loud cries that is veering away from the real case.

I just had this thought, did Pemberton believe he was being robbed or something like that, which is why a transgender was carrying out deception? But that’s a wild guess.

Looks like the transgender community seems to work using deception, which ruins their image. And that will raise violent reactions from other people. So if we demand transparency from the government, can’t we ask of the same from ordinary people?

And the US did after all send drafted soldiers to Vietnam who were age 19. Remember the song by Paul Hardcastle?

It’s funny when I read: boo hoo hoo, he/she/it doesn’t deserve to be murdered. Here’s a thought, maybe he wanted to be murdered? I mean why else would he purposely try to deceive another guy, without expecting a physical response? I say it was suicide by penis, case closed

Yes, really. The young Marine was making out with what he thought was a beautiful girl, fists started flying (as expected) when the tranny’s dingaling came out. Tranny was a physical weakling that couldn’t take the beating, so he won the Darwin award. Ok, maybe it’s suicide by dingaling.

No, really. The young marine was a closet case gay who knew Jeffrey was male. When they got back to the hotel room he threw his legs up into the air and demanded that Jeffrey fuck him. Jeffrey refused. Pemberton became enraged and strangled Jeffrey. It is obviously suicide! LOL

This is not a rape case. The Male/Female issue will confuse legal experts. Laude deceived Pemberton…by trying to work as a “woman” prostitute. In truth, he was a man who became a “woman”.

It’s like making love to a Humanoid Robot Prostitute. The Humanoid Robot, looks like a “real woman”; acted in lovemaking like a “real woman”. Then, you found out: It was a Humanoid Robot prostitute.You are making love to a machine, not the “real thing”…Finally, you “killed” (destroyed) the Humanoid Robot Prostitute, in your outrage; because of the deceit…is this homicide or murder? I know Laude is a human being; and not a Humanoid Robot…but, there is a similarity in the situation…

Wow, that is an elaborate story. I don’t think anyone will ever know what actually happened between those two people. A more interesting question is, why do filipinos love finger-pointing and cis-mis? Is it because justice in this country is usually “deferred”?

What is apparent in many comments is what “triple r” referred to in an earlier comment as: “lack of perspective and proportionality.” JUSTICE = JUST (FAIR)

It would be very difficult or impossible to get deception involved as the primary reason for killing. A move that is very elementary and basic which in the end would not in anyway favour the defendant at all. The heart of the matter is who killed the victim? Killing is what they are interested with not the deception, alcohol intoxication, rape , what the victim
does for a living, gender, or whatever you can think of. You can not consider reasons that are somewhat bizarre .

From all the comments given, I was wondering why no commentary was ever made on the findings that two used condoms were found inside the room, a crime scene. If there was a deception, why did Pemberton, if he was the guilty party, used two condoms? Was he drunk not to realise or discover that when he was using the first condom it was a man he was penetrating? He must have been satisfied to use another condom to have sex with a man? Or was it a case of sadomasochism sex ritual that gone wrong? Also, wanted to explore one comment in this page that Pemberton was a closet gay? I wonder how this too would help enlighten many of the observers in this exchange of ideas and interpretation.

I’ve stayed in the small hotels at Malate to party back in the day, and saw used condoms left behind by previous occupants at bathroom trash cans. The hotel in Olongapo shown on TV is WAY CHEAPER. No surprise they found used condoms, and way too easy to assume they didn’t belong to the lovebirds in question

How could you ever explain a used condom
with fecal matter found in the bin. Anal sex occured obviously !!! meaning he knew and accepted Jennifer is in fact a transgender. Now the deadly anger might have came from when pemberton discovered he had some cash stolen. Now listen since background revealing is part of this article mentioned above. Let me just say this. In America you have to pay for university not everyone can affiord.. Joining the military could land you a job even if you are a high school graduate an option that most would choose. In reality the wage is not that high along with sacrifices of being offshore for months away from
family. Every cent count for these people and very cautious on how much they spend in every continent they land minding the exchange rate. Stolen 40 bucks would probably trigger extreme anger .

Karlson, quit pulling stories out of your ass. Forensic tests are ongoing, but so far authorities have NOT stated there was fecal material on any condoms. Further, the hotel rented rooms by the hour to a multitude of whores. Not noted for cleanliness, those condoms found could have been from days ago.

The marine was earning over $2,000 a month and his living expenses were $0. Don’t try to scam us with some bullshit story about how $40 is a lot of money. It’s not the amount of money that would cause anger, it’s the simple fact of having been robbed.

All of the facts are still out so we don’t know what actually happened or why. But if you are going to hypothesize, at least don’t be an idiot about it.

Read paragraph 2 of Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code as amended by RA 8353. Rape can be committed by any person (man or woman) who shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another person’s mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person (man or woman) if done under circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 (i.e., the 4 circumstances already mentioned in the article).

Jeffrey Laude, on bended knees, was repeatedly chanting the Drill Instructor’s marching chant in the movie “Full Metal Jacket” to Joseph Pemberton. Laude to Pemberton: “This is your rifle. This is your gun. You hold your rifle while I suck off your gun!”

Obviously you do not understand how violent lady boys. This was most probably self defense from violent attack. Thailand you can read of numerous killings by lady boys. Chemical imbalance from drugs to alter their body some say is the cause of their extreme psychopathic violent nature.

He’ll hath no fury like a ladyboy scorned. My guess is Pemberton deserves a medal for protecting himself against the older man Jeffrey. I have seen Ladyboys in action. They would certainly hold their own with a professional boxer. Recently in Pattaya a 21 year old Norwegian man had his throat cut from the high heel shoes of a ladyboy after he took exception after ladyboy touching his groin area while he was walking minding his own business. Ladyboys have such a violent and dishonest reputation some hotels ban them from entering.

Everybody has the right to choose. If I chose to go out with a woman. Then that’s it. You plan your day to have a good time with a woman then at the very exciting part of your plan you found out that you were spending your whole time with a transgender, then I will also be so pissed. Not to mention that you were half way thru your intimate moment. I have no problem with transgenders, gay people or lesbians. My problem is being conned to something I chose not to do. Pemberton’s reaction was insane. He should not have killed Laude. But I do understand his anger on the way things happened for him. I also feel sorry for Laude but i think he should not have lied to Pemberton.

People forget that the real issue is that of murder. If Jeffrey aka Jennifer Laude were a real woman, people would just focus on the murder angle. But since he/she is a transgender woman people seem to forget about the fact that he/she was murdered. A horrible crime was done and it matters not what the sexual orientation of the victim is. The fact that people still focus on him being a transgender female, means that our society does not accept transgender people yet.

Gen, you must be confused. That Jeffrey was a tranny is, while amusing, hardly the issue. If you have deeply rooted psychological issues and want to be a freak, it’s your right. Just as we have the right to laugh about it.

The REAL issue here is that our tranny Jeffrey was a) a liar, b) a thief, c) a fraud artist and d) a whore.

Sure, he didn’t really deserve to die (as far as we know), but now that he is dead the gene pool is far better off. Darwin won.

one of the most convincing evidence is the used condom. however, f pemberton refused to give a sample of his sperm, (it is his right) it can not be used as evidence in favor of either side. i just wonder…. f these two men acted/behaved as they should have be behaving, would there be a tragedy like this?

He killed a person by stuffing their head into a toilet. This is a very aggressive act of murder. It has nothing to do with his feigned surprise at being duped into a homosexual act. He may have been a nice kid to his neighbors in the US, but to your country men, he showed up as a depraved murderer. Get real yourself.